Travis Oliphant wrote:
> You are right. We would also have to have a variable storing the number
> of shares, and then objects that share the data would have to decrement
> it correctly. So, it's a lot harder than a simple flag. In fact, I
> don't think we should pursue it...
As I said, it's reference counting, in a language with automatic memory
management. You'd have to impose that any object which refers to another MUST
always call a .close() method, much like is done with files (python doesn't
guarantee that it closes files when they go out of scope, only when the
interpreter shuts down).
I don't think any of us wants to have to write;
b = a[::2]
c = z[1::3]
...
b.close(); c.close();...
return
This is slow, error prone and annoying. So let's not :)
Cheers,
f